The Perfect Distribution of Organelles in the Cell

 

The basic structural unit of creatures, the cell, is incredibly complex enough to leave people amazed. Just like the existence of a single cell, the harmony and cooperation in the cell is very impressive. As the structure of the cell and systems in it are further investigated and new details are found, this perfect order is seen more clearly.

A single cell may be said to resemble a large city with its operation systems, communication networks, transportation and administration. The power plants generate the power used by cells; the plants generate the enzyme and hormones which are essential for life; the data bank including all information regarding the products to be manufactured; the complex transportation systems and pipelines transferring the raw materials and products from one region to the other; the laboratories and refineries separating the raw materials taken from outside into the useful parts; the expert cell membrane proteins executing the enter and exit controls of materials to be taken in or sent out of the cell create only a part of this structure.

Just like cities, there is a dense traffic flow caused by the molecules like “moving on the boats”, “walking” and “taking hands” like people and by the “trucks carrying the organelles” in the cells. However, there is a great order in cells against the traffic congestion in these cities.

An investigation demonstrating this smooth order was made in Exeter University in recent days and the results were published in the journal Nature Communications. This study has shown one more time that the dispersion of organelles in the cell is not random at all, and is caused by a motion depending on energy.

As is known, organelles are specialized functional units of cells. The organelles for the cell are the same as organs in the body. Each organelle has special duties to ensure the sustaining of the cell. The order in the arrangement of organelles inside the cell is also exceptional. Let us review the results of the research showing how this positioning occurs in the cell.

The distribution of organelles is executed by a special molecule named  ATP (adenosine triphosphate). The energy attained from food items is first packaged in ATP. Later on, this energy is used in all the production and transportation processes that take place inside the cell. Actually, ATP is like the fuel for molecular motors, which transport its cargo along the fibers of the cytoskeleton. Just like  trucking rigs carrying a load, organelles are also carried by means of this fuel from one place to the other as to the needs. During the transportation process, other organelles are also both dragged and kept under the impact of a turbulence increasing their motion. However, these motions never occur randomly. Organelles do not get clustered in a certain part of the cell, or become dispersed randomly; in short, their distribution does not cause any disorder.  Quite the contrary, such organization of the cell’s components is essential to ensure their interaction and persistence of the cell. Lead researcher Professor Gero Steinberg, Chair in Cell Biology and Director of the Bioimaging Centre at the University of Exeter, said the following on this matter:

"Many people had previously assumed that organelles are randomly-distributed, as that's how they appear. Our research has revealed a new fundamental principle of the way cells organize themselves -- that they use energy to create this seemingly random, even distribution. This allows the organelles to interact with each other throughout the cell.”[i]

If organelles were distributed randomly during their transportation as claimed prior to this research, certain diseases would arise. In fact, organelle clustering without proper distribution inside the cell is found in some human disorders, such as Zellweger Syndrome, which is a fatal disease. Children born with this disorder may only live until the age of one”.[ii]

While evolutionists cannot even explain the origin of a single protein molecule, they keep up with their allegations that the cell came into existence through coincidences. The impasse of evolutionists is not limited with their not being able to explain how the protein and cell originated: Just like the order in the distribution of organelles in the cell, they are obliged to give an account for the existence of thousands of other mechanisms, and how inorganic molecules could give structure to such organizations that necessitate confounding consciousness, information and intelligence.

This new scientific research carried out by Exeter University makes evident that organelles in the cell are not dispersed randomly and they cannot be moved from one place to another without an intelligence that directs them. There is no doubt that this perfect order in the cell is not the coincidental ability of organelles that lack intellect or consciousness. On the contrary, that is one of the most profound instances of Almighty God’s infinite power and His artistry in Creation. God reveals the following in a verse:

“That is God, your Lord. There is no god but Him, the Creator of everything. So worship Him. He is responsible for everything.” 

(Surat al-An’am, 102)

 

---

[i] University of Exeter. "How to organize a cell: Novel insight from a fungus." ScienceDaily, 2 June 2016. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160602083246.htm

[ii] Femke C. C. Klouwer, Kevin Berendse, Sacha Ferdinandusse, Ronald J. A. Wanders, Marc Engelen and Bwee Tien Poll-The. “Zellweger spectrum disorders: clinical overview and management approach.” Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 2015; 10: 151

Plos One Journal Finally Admitted: "Lucy Is Not An Ancestor Of Man, She Is An Ape"

The 3.2 million-year-old fossil discovered in Africa in 1974, popularly known as  "Lucy", has been periodically brought up for propaganda purposes. However, with the ever-growing means of science and technology, it has become evident that this fossil, which had been long alleged to be  "evidence" for the theory of evolution, has actually dealt a devastating blow to the theory.

Although the Lucy fossil is supposedly portrayed as a transitional form specimen representing the so-called evolution from ape to man, it has in fact proven this claim to be a scenario based on mere prejudice.

Today, all the international scientific journals with a board of academics are, one by one, saying their goodbyes to Lucy. Now, let us take a look at some of the confessions about Lucy featured in journals from the past until today:

Evolutionists' Confession in 1999: "ADIEU LUCY"

In May 1999, the well-recognized Science et Vie journal used the title "Adieu Lucy" (Goodbye Lucy) on its cover and wrote that the apes of the Australopithecus genus should be removed from human genealogy. The article, written upon a new Australopithecus fossil discovery code-named St W573, included the following statements:

A new theory states that the genus Australopithecus is not the root of the human race… Australopithecus and Homo (human) species do not appear on the same branch. 

However, this farewell was not limited to Science et Vie journal. After that, confessions on the fossil known as "Lucy" kept coming with each passing day.

Evolutionists' Confession in 2000: "We Should Stop Bringing Lucy Up"

Another article published in 2000 in the journal Nature confessed that Lucy was a member of an ape species. The article wrote that the Lucy fossil, with respect to her "relatively long and curved fingers, relatively long arms, and funnel-shaped chest" was exactly like chimpanzees. Upon the close examination of its hand bones, the confession came that contrary to what had been previously claimed, Lucy was not bipedal, but "knuckle-walked as chimps and gorillas do today."¹

The ape-like features of the Lucy fossil are not limited to its way of walking and hand bone structure only. Its chin is U-shaped, identical to those of ape species, and teeth are quite large compared to humans.

Anthropologists from Tel Aviv University have also pointed out that the upward-projecting mandible  (mandibular ramus) on Lucy's lower jaw is very similar to that of gorillas, and thereupon, researchers advocating the theory of evolution have consented that keeping the Lucy fossil on the agenda will not serve their interests.²

Evolutionists' Confession in 2016: "Lucy is a Chimpanzee"

A more recent study on Lucy published in the November 2016 issue of PLOS One gave the same results. Researchers from Johns Hopkins University and the University of Texas, who micro-CT scanned Lucy's skeleton by tomography, admitted that much of Lucy's life had been spent in trees and that, from this aspect, it resembled a chimpanzee more than a human being.³

John Kappelman, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Texas at Austin, examined Lucy's skeleton at the National Museum in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and interpreted it as follows:

"I think that by demonstrating with an independent data set that Lucy very likely spent enough time in the trees that the evidence is preserved in her bones provides additional support for the idea that she may have fallen out of a tree as well... She (Lucy) comes out showing a similarity to chimpanzees which suggests that was due to climbing.”  ⁴

However, these facts revealed by modern technology were already known at the time of the fossil’s discovery. In a speech at the University of Missouri, Kansas City on November 20, 1986⁵, Dr. Johanson claimed they had found a knee bone and asserted their allegations that Lucy is the ancestor of man based on this bone. In response to this claim, one of the participants (Roy Holt) asked Johanson, "How far away from Lucy did you find the knee?" Dr. Johanson answered, "About 200 feet lower and two to three kilometers away." Continuing, when he was asked, "Then why are you sure it belonged to Lucy?" he answered, "Anatomical similarity". But this answer was met with cynicism because of the scientific inconsistency it posed. The scientific world was already aware of the fact that even completely different species such as dogs and bears could bear anatomical similarities.

As is seen, Lucy has been promoted as ‘man's so-called ancestor’ for 43 years through a specially devised, biased propaganda, even though it was widely known that the fossilized skull belonged to an ape since the moment of its discovery. The entire world was indoctrinated as if it was the ‘so-called 'missing link’ between man and ape. However, this unscientific and non-factual supposition has been repeatedly disproved in every means of studying it under the light of advanced science and technology.

To date, circles that advocate evolutionary theory for ideological reasons have made a number of fossil forgeries and fictitious claims. However, not even a single one of these allegations have been proven scientifically, while on the other hand, their fallacy has been consistently demonstrated.

There is only one fact that 21st Century science shows us: Living beings have neither gone through evolution nor gradually transformed from one species to another as a result of blind chance.  

Modern life forms and their millions-year-old counterparts all share the same appearance. They did not undergo even a single change despite the millions of years that have passed in between. They have retained the same features as they have today since the moment they came into existence. Living things did not appear on earth through millions of years of evolution but they came into existence suddenly, with all the features they possess intact in their bodies. In other words, they were created by God.

"We did not create heaven and earth and everything between them to no purpose. That is the opinion of those who deny…" (Qur’an, 38:27)

SOURCES:

1. Mark Collard and Leslie C. Aiello, "From forelimbs to two legs," Nature (March 23, 2000), 404:339–340.
2. Siegel-Itzkovich, Judy, Israeli Researchers: ‘Lucy’ is not direct ancestor of humans, The Jerusalem Post, http://www.jpost.com/Health-and-Sci-Tech/Science-And-Environment/Israeli-researchers-Lucy-is-not-direct-ancestor-of-humans
3. Christopher B. Ruff , M. Loring Burgess, Richard A. Ketcham, John Kappelman. Limb Bone Structural Proportions and Locomotor Behavior in A.L. 288-1 ("Lucy"). PLOS ONE, 2016 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166095
4. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/deadthings/2016/11/30/the-latest-on-lucy-early-hominin-spent-serious-time-in-trees/#.WHfotBuLSUk 
5. http://spiritualcoretheory.com/lucy-fails-test-as-missing-link/

Can Spider Silk Be Finally Produced Artificially?

Spider silk is a substance with incredible properties that has proven to be quite hard to imitate. Following are a few of these features:

Spider silk is five times stronger than steel of the same diameter.

It can stretch four times its initial length.

It is extremely light in weight. For example; a spider silk strand that could be stretched around the globe would only weigh 320 grams.¹

Being able to artificially mass-produce this amazing substance has long been a dream of many scientists. If this dream comes true, many sectors, from the military to healthcare would benefit enormously from spider silk. To give examples to the products planned to be manufactured using spider silk:

Bulletproof clothing

Wear-resistant lightweight clothing

Ropes, nets, seat belts, parachutes

Rust-free panels on motor vehicles or boats

Biodegradable bottles

Bandages, surgical thread

Artificial tendons or ligaments, support for weak blood vessels.

Why Spider Silk Cannot Be Produced Through Natural Means?

There are inherent problems that come with the incredibly difficult process of natural spider silk production. It is nearly impossible to breed spiders and farm them for their silk like silkworms; it would be far too arduous a procedure. Moreover, since the silk obtained from spiders is very limited, it does not meet the amount required for mass production. So, all these challenges led scientists to carry out research on the possibility of artificial production of spider silk.   

News From Sweden Caused Excitement In Scientific Circles

A major step has been taken on the issue of spider silk with research recently conducted by the scientists of Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and the Karolinska Institute. Led by Anna Rising, the research team announced they had developed a new method, which allows them to produce a kilometer-long material that has the same properties with spider silk.

Before being spun into a fiber, spider silk, which is made of proteins, is stored as an aqueous solution in the silk glands. The research showed that there is an impressive pH gradient in the spider silk gland, and that this well-regulated pH gradient affects specific parts of the spider silk proteins. It was seen that this ensures the rapid formation of fiber in a defined place of the silk production apparatus. In this manner, its production has become suitable for industrial use.

"To our surprise, this artificial protein is as water soluble as the natural spider silk proteins, which means that it is possible to keep the proteins soluble at extreme concentrations. This is the first successful example of biomimetic spider silk spinning," says the team leader, Anna Rising.

What truly excites scientists, especially Anna Rising, is that now the industrial production of spider silk will be possible. With its production, this fruitful silk will begin to be used in many of the fields we have listed above.

State-of-the-art technology, hundreds of scientists, hundreds of thousands of dollars spent: What is to be achieved through all these means at hand is the silk flawlessly produced by the tiny body of a spider for millions of years. And the silk that was produced in the laboratory environment could only be obtained after countless hours scientists had spent devising a strategy and making a myriad number of highly complex calculations. Just as we cannot explain the formation stages of this silk with coincidences, so too can we not explain the silk produced by a spider in the same way.

No matter which creature we examine in nature, we definitely come across a "technologically wondrous" superiority they posses. Dozens of articles can be written solely about the silk of a tiny spider. Besides, their silk is not the only amazing aspect of spiders; these creatures exhibit many superior abilities from their hunting techniques to the webs they weave, which are marvels of design. There are millions of similar creatures in nature that we can draw inspiration from and every living organism is equipped with many superior features. Our Lord, Whose creation is flawless, presented every entity, organic or non-organic, for the benefit of us, humans. God informs us about this fact in a verse of the Qur'an as follows:

And there is certainly a lesson for you in your livestock. We give you to drink from what is in their bellies and there are many ways in which you benefit from them, and some of them you eat. (Surat al-Muminun, 21)

References:

"Structure and Properties of Spider Silk", Endeavour, Ocak 1986, sayı 10, s. 42
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170109124957.htm
http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/spider/page4.htm

The 99-Million-Year-Old Hatchling Fossil Ended The Evolution Journey Of Birds

In 2014, a Burmese Amber (tree resin) fossil dating back 99 million years was discovered in Myanmar. The fossil was exhibited in museums in 2017. The fossil, which was initially thought to be a saurian by many, contained the remains of a newly-hatched bird. As a result of studies carried out by researchers from China, the US and Canada, it was stated that the fossil belonged to the Cretaceous period (145 to 66 million years ago); the bird's neck, skull, clawed foot and a partial wing were preserved in the amber. However, the scientists stated that the tissues in the fossil are damaged and there are no usable DNA samples.

This bird fossil, called "Belone", is thought to belong to an extinct major group of birds who had teeth in their beaks and clawed fingers on their wings and belonged to the Cretaceous period in which the dinosaurs existed. This extinct bird species, which is also known as enantiornithes (toothed birds), has only three characteristics that distinguish them from today's birds. These characteristics include that they had teeth in their breaks, clawed fingers on their wings and different type of wing connection. Apart from these, they show the same characteristics with today's birds.

Evolutionists try to present some bird species that are similar to the aforementioned fossil, as living beings with "underdeveloped flying skills" by asserting that they had teeth in their beaks and clawed fingers on their wings. They introduce these creatures as a so-called "intermediate form" between dinosaurs and modern birds. Nonetheless, the toothed and clawed birds which lived in the past had remarkable flying skills. The presence of teeth and claws doesn't make that bird an intermediate form. The toothed birds are extinct today, but babies of Tauraco corythaix and Opisthocomus hoatzin species, which exist today, also have claws on their wings. These birds are excellent flyers.

If you pay attention, Belone is a newly-hatched bird and has claws on its wings. Today's Tauraco corythaix and Opisthocomus hoatzin hatchlings have claws on their wings too. The hatchling, still incapable of proper flight, can hide from predators by climbing among dense tree branches thanks to these claws. Hence, the reason for the inability of the aforementioned living being to fly is not because it is an intermediate form as claimed by evolutionists, but because it is a baby. The living being's ability o fly develops within three or four weeks. Now that the hatchling can fly, it does not need the claws. After this stage, as the Tauraco corythaix and Opisthocomus hoatzin approach adulthood, the claws would fall off their wings after a while, so these claws are no longer found in adults. This rejects the unfounded claims of the evolutionists and shows a miracle in creation. The claws are vital when young, but there is no need for them afterwards. Although the living being has the same genetics both in babyhood and adulthood, the genetic information is used in a great way at the right time and in the appropriate way.

It is most likely that the claws on the hatchling Belone were the type that fall off in time. The existence of Tauraco corythaix and Opisthocomus hoatzin proves this to us. More importantly, the presence of claws in the wings is presented as a reason for introducing the living being as an "evolving creature". The presence of claws in the wings of a creature does not prove that the creature is incapable of flight. This is nothing but mere speculation that evolutionists, who are used to demagogy, have used for years instead of science.

Before Belone, there was little information about birds that existed in the Cretaceous period, so the evolutionists – as a requisite of their imagination and their ideology- made all their comments on the subjects about which there is no evidence, in favor of the so-called evolution. They have introduced birds with different anatomical characteristics, such as Archeopteryx, as so-called "transitional forms". The claims about this matter came to an end with the successive discovery of Archeopteryx fossils, and especially with the discovery of a fossil preserved along with soft tissues inside an amber. All the anatomical features of Archeopteryx scientifically documented that it is a perfect flying bird. As you might recall, Archeopteryx is a clawed bird as well.

The feather structure of "Belone" is also frustrating for evolutionists. Because complex structures such as feathers and wings should exhibit a gradual development according to evolutionist logic; evolutionists claim that the so-called primitive birds should not be fully capable of flight, and that there should be a number of impediments in their wing and feather structures that restrict proper flight. Despite the fact that Belone is a newly hatched bird, it has primary and secondary flight feathers asymmetrically arranged with features providing excellent aerodynamics, as observed in today's birds.  In other words, the anatomical structure providing the aerodynamic characteristics of the feathers has not undergone any changes for 100 million years. This is one of the most significant blows dealt to the theory of evolution.

Although Belone is a newly hatched bird, it still has feathers suitable for flight. Today's birds usually do not have feathers suitable for flight when they hatch. They need the care of their parents for a certain period of time. The flight feathers begin to form after a while. This is not because they are primitive creatures, but because they are babies. This type of feature is very similar to the Australian brush-turkey (Australian megapodes) which exists today. It has been observed that Belone has excellent and intact feather structure that will allow it to fly just like the Australian brush-turkey hatchlings. Australian brush-turkey hatchlings’ unique characteristic that separates them from other modern birds is that they do not need special care from the parents after they hatch; that is, the hatchlings come out of their eggs with all the characteristics that will enable it to survive. Again, unlike other birds, Australian brush-turkey eggs are placed not on the trees but on nests built in the soil by the father turkey and kept at a constant 33°C. The newly-hatched baby must immediately climb the trees and acquire the ability to fly to be protected from danger. For this reason, it has feathers that enable it to fly from the first day. The fact that the feathers of Belone are also suitable for flying shows that it does not need much parental care after it hatches. The fact that a baby bird hatches with the characteristics enabling it to survive on its own is another miracle of Creation and refutes the claims of evolution.

Briefly, with its flying ability and anatomical structure, "Belone" has the characteristics of an excellent bird. It has no half, missing, dysfunctional organ or structure. Furthermore, it shows similar anatomic characteristics with Tauraco corythaix, Opisthocomus hoatzin and Australian brush-turkeys which exists today.

The discovery of the fossil of a living being, which existed 99 million years ago with the characteristics of a fully developed bird, clearly shows that birds existed during this period and did not evolve from flying dinosaurs.

Taking The Materialistic Blinders Off

Recently, a major discovery took the science world by storm. Newspapers broke the news of how researches at the CERN laboratory in Switzerland proved that according to the known laws of physics, the universe should not have existed. .

In the study published in Nature, a team of scientists led by Christian Smorra managed to gain a deeper insight on antimatter. The research concluded that matter and antimatter basically have the same physical properties, the only exception being their electrical charges. This conclusion was pointing to an extremely important fact: The universe should have never existed.

Modern physics tells us that our universe was brought into existence following an explosion called the Big Bang. Matter and antimatter were created in equal amounts at the initial moment of the explosion, in which case matter and antimatter, sharing the same physical properties, should have completely annihilated each other, leaving behind nothing but a flash of light. In other words, the universe we live in should have never existed in the first place.

The 20th Century was a period marked by a predominant materialistic world view. The world of science at the time told humanity that the universe functioned through cause and effect relationships, working in accordance with the defined laws of physics. However, technological advances began to challenge the previously undisputed laws of physics.

Firstly, with the introduction of the quantum physics, scientific journals started to feature articles one after another the discoveries showing that the known laws of physics do not apply to the nano world.

The quantum world, which examines matter at a subatomic particle level, seemed to operate differently than the world visible to the naked eye. In the quantum world, subatomic particles can simultaneously exist in two places, and they sometimes behave as matter while at others times as light, allowing them to pass through wall barriers.

Today, more and more scientists agree that the known laws of physics do not apply at the quantum level. Jim al Khalili, a professor of theoretical physics at the University of Surrey, explains this fact as follows:

"... down in the microscopic quantum world, particles can behave in these strange ways, like doing two things at once, being able to pass through walls or possessing spooky connections, only when no one is looking."

We encounter these same odd properties of the quantum world when we go up to the macro-cosmos as well. Astrophysicists have lately established two important concepts into the scientific world: "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy." Dark matter is a term coined to name a type of matter that has never been physically observed but nonetheless has to exist according to the known laws of physics. Dark energy is the name given to a type of energy that has to exist hidden somewhere in the universe, but is impossible to observe in any way. In other words, the effects of both dark matter and dark energy are visible, but they elude visible observation.

When astronomers estimated the quantities of dark energy and dark matter, the results they obtained were even more astonishing. The laws of physics that have been generally accepted since Einstein dictate that 68 percent of the universe should consist of dark energy while 27 percent consists of dark matter; the observable universe, consisting of planets, stars and galaxies, make up the remaining 5 percent.

In other words, according to the latest scientific findings, 95 percent of the universe was filled with a type of matter that we could never see, yet is proven to exist and is something we have no knowledge about.

The laws of gravity put forward by Einstein were unable to account for the 95 percent of the universe, leaving a huge gap in his theory. This situation sparked a debate among scientists about the validity of the laws of physics known to date.

The said discoveries, which are at odds with the known laws of physics, prompted the scientific world to question what we know about matter. Elon Musk, the founder of SpaceX and Tesla Motors in particular, along with many scientists, have started to question whether matter exists in the sense that we know.

According to Musk, the odds that the universe we live in is actually real is one in a billion. Scientific American editor Michael Moyer argues that we perceive a two-dimensional world as three-dimensional. Meanwhile, renowned philosopher and Director of Oxford University Future of Humanity Institute, Nick Bostrom, says that universe is nothing more than a fake illusion.

The idea that we may be living in an imaginary universe, which is currently being discussed by scientists, has actually been a recurrent topic of debate throughout history. The 17th Century philosopher Descartes is among the pioneers of this subject in the scientific world.

Both at the quantum level and in the macro-cosmos, scientific findings have long indicated the existence of a Creator. Both of these realms defy the known laws of physics, which are built upon the absolute existence of matter.

However, accepting this fact would spell the moribundity of the cause and effect relationship, the basis of materialism, thus taking away the entire foundation from under the materialist scientists. This blind commitment to materialism however causes some circles to disregard the amazing truths disclosed by quantum.

The Qur'an brings forth a thought-provoking perspective to the cause and effect relationship: Do you not see how your Lord stretches out shadows? If He had wished He could have made them stationary. Then We appoint the sun to be the pointer to them. (Qur'an, 25:45).

God says He created the shadows, and then appointed the Sun to be the pointer to them. In other words, God's art of creation follows an inverse cause and effect relationship. First, the effect comes into existence, and then the cause is created. This point offered today also by science was established in the Quran 1400 years ago.

There will come a point down the line where the scientific world will have to question its materialistic worldview. Once the presupposition that "Matter is absolute and the universe is governed by causes and laws" is discarded, science, which has been running in circles around basic issues, will inevitably make a giant leap forward.

1. http://nationalpost.com/news/world/scientists-still-have-no-idea-why-the-universe-exists
2. https://www.amazon.com/Life-Edge-Coming-Quantum-Biology/dp/0307986829/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
3. https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy
4. https://www.quantamagazine.org/erik-verlindes-gravity-minus-dark-matter-20161129/
5. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
6. http://www.crystalinks.com/holographic.html
7. https://www.space.com/30124-is-our-universe-a-fake.html

Evolution Fails To Deny Creator

In his article in 2016, Harvard biologist Jack Szostak, a Nobel Prize winner, claimed that he had discovered a method that allows ribonucleic acid (RNA) to self-replicate.

This claim has been introduced as an answer to a very important question about the origin of life. However, only after a year, he was forced to retract his essay.

Szostak’s lab at Harvard University has been hard at work trying to find an answer to the origin of life for many years.

Of course, this research is not objective or unbiased; their efforts are based on the assumption that life emerged through coincidences on its own, that is, by so-called evolutionary mechanisms.

Szostak’s lab was particularly interested in how RNA could replicate itself without enzymes. In the article that Szostak had to retract, he claimed that RNA could self-replicate without enzymes.

It is noteworthy to briefly explain why Szostak and many other scientists are desperately searching for the supposedly “self-replicating” RNA.

Evolutionists find themselves in a conundrum when they try to explain how the DNA molecule that contains the information of the proteins came into being in the first place.

Having failed to explain the complexity of DNA through coincidences, evolutionists sought new ways to explain it in the 1980s. Harvard chemist Walter Gilbert developed a scenario in 1986, claiming that billions of years ago, a self-replicating RNA molecule was somehow formed by itself.

He then claimed that this RNA molecule suddenly started to produce proteins with the help of environmental conditions. After that, he claimed, a need to keep this information on a second molecule arose, but he claimed the DNA molecule, nevertheless, managed to “form on its own”.

Like many evolutionists, Szostak believes that RNA was the first organic molecule to come into being. However, evolutionists need to show how RNA can replicate itself without other enzymes and proteins.

This is what Szostak’s lab was working on. They thought that if such a mechanism was found, the RNA’s ability to self-replicate would be confirmed, and that RNA could have formed through so-called evolution before DNA or proteins existed, which they hoped would provide a foundation for the evolutionist claims to the origin of life.

However, they never achieved this goal because neither RNA nor any part of the cell were products of coincidence.

The article that was published in Nature Chemistry in 2016 as a “discovery” that supported the theory of evolution, and that prompted Nobel prize winner Szostak, was about this “finding”.

However, post-doctoral researcher Tivoli Olsen from Szostak’s laboratory could not obtain the same results despite repeating the same experiments.

Not only was he unable to obtain the same results, Tivoli also saw that the previous results of the experiment had been misinterpreted.

Consequently, Szostak’s article was retracted. Szostak confessed that this “debacle” was “absolutely embarrassing” and continued:

“In retrospect, we were totally blinded by our belief (in our findings) — we were not as careful or rigorous as we should have been (and as Tivoli was) in interpreting these experiments.”

In fact, Szotsak’s sincere confession is quite significant.

The theory of evolution, which is not based on evidence, has been advocated for materialistic purposes because it was considered as the only way to deny the existence of a Creator.

Every scientific finding, from the moment they are discovered, has always been interpreted based on the theory of evolution by these people. As seen in Szotsak’s confession, their belief in evolution mars the objectivity of many scientists, causing them to misinterpret findings.

What is even more interesting is that how Szotsak’s words, which were aimed at those who believe in creation, actually described his own situation.

He said: “I think that belief systems based on faith are inherently dangerous, as they leave the believer susceptible to manipulation when scepticism and inquiries are discouraged.”

As can be seen, Szotsak’s words, in fact, quite accurately described people who blindly believe in the theory of evolution, even though there is no evidence to support it.

The theory of evolution is a non-scientific belief. Materialists and evolutionists have firmly embraced the theory of evolution to avoid acknowledging the fact that the universe and life are the products of a Creator.

In fact, since the 19th century, science has been stalled by evolutionist and materialist perspective, and a great amount of time, energy and material resources are being wasted in this regard. Every piece of evidence, from fossils to microscopic discoveries, are being assessed from an evolutionist and materialistic perspective.

The well-known confession of Richard Lewontin, a geneticist and evolutionist from Harvard University, clearly describes this fact: “We have ‘a priori’ commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world. On the contrary, that we are forced by our ‘a priori’ adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”

The coexistence of the “necessary substances”, “necessary environmental conditions” and “necessary interventions” in necessary amounts and in the right time, in an idle, purposeless, aimless, uncontrolled environment, where no knowledge and intelligence exists as evolutionists claim, is indeed impossible.

Even for the formation of a single RNA molecule, an intelligent, knowing and powerful Creator must exist.

This is a very clear and definite truth, a truth demonstrated by science. Any effort to prove otherwise are condemned to be “retracted”.

 

---

[1] http://retractionwatch.com/2017/12/05/definitely-embarrassing-nobel-laureate-retracts-non-reproducible-paper-nature-journal/#more-52894

[2] Richard Lewontin, The Demon-Haunted World, The New York Review of Books, January 9, 1997, s. 28

A fact admitted even by evolutionists: Australopithecus sediba is not an ancestor of man!

As is known, a skull fossil belonging to a 12 or 13-year-old discovered in Malapa in 2008 was given the name "Australopithecus sediba". Between 2010 and 2013, six different articles about the said skull were published in Science magazine and it was declared among evolutionists as the so-called missing link that could be the ancestor of man.

Evolutionist claimed that A. Sediba, which is thought to have existed some two million years ago, predating Homo Erectus, must be the ancestor of man. As a result, various supposedly scientific articles were written, predicated on the claim that the fossil belonged to a transitional form due to some similarities it shared with Australopithecuses and some with humans. These articles made the headlines of many media outlets.

On 2010, when the articles were freshly published, we published our own articles refuting these claims. ^1,2 

At the annual meeting of the American Physical Anthropologists Association in 2017, this issue was re-addressed by Bill Kimbel, a paleoanthropologist at Arizona State University. The A. Sediba skull was examined; old claims were refuted one by one, and the fact that Sediba is not an ancestor of humans but merely resembles other Australopithecenes was accepted. Thus, the so-called human ancestor claim that had been kept up for seven years was rejected by evolutionists.

The claim versus the fact.

Narrow cheekbones, small teeth, a pronounced nose:

The features of the said skull belonging to a 13-year-old life form were said to bear a closer resemblance to humans than Australopithecus so it was introduced as a so-called pre-human transitional form. However, it is glaringly obvious that the juvenile fossil did not complete its development. Thus, it is impossible to compare it with the available adult fossils. Even if we isolate and closely monitor a human or an animal from a young age, many anatomical differences occur with age even in the same individual. A 15-year-old has an entirely distinct skeletal structure than a 5-year-old. Likewise, there are many differences between when he is 15 and when he is an adult. Therefore, it is impossible to reach an accurate conclusion about a fossil based solely on minor structural differences.

The most crucial factor impacting the development of cheekbones and teeth is found in eating habits. A life form, whose diet requires vigorous and frequent chewing, will accordingly develop stronger chewing muscles or they will grow weaker in the opposite case. The bone structures that muscles are attached to and teeth will also develop or remain narrow at the same rate. Note that it is environmental factors rather than genetic ones at work here; bones and muscles undergo change and development to the extent allowed by genes. This fact gives rise to great structural differences even between the separate individuals of the same species. In other words, the existence of multiple variations is not an indication of diverse species. Therefore, notions such as cheekbone width or teeth size are not reliable when it comes to the classification of species. 

Narrow hip bone and long femurs: 

Following the first skull finding in 2008, the ongoing excavation works on the same site this time yielded new fossil fragments belonging to an adult's hip bone and femurs. The ensuing speculations proclaimed that the fragments belonged to an adult A. Sediba. The narrow hip bone and long femurs of the life form were construed as being more suitable for standing and walking upright. However, there was practically no evidence suggesting that the two separate fossils belonged to the same species.

Age determination conducted on the fossils discovered in adjacent strata are based on the principle of determining the age of the strata where the fossil was found rather than the age of the fossil remain itself. This is a practice that leads to many possible misinterpretations. Fossils’ being found in the same strata and place is in no way an indication of the fact that they lived in the same period. Age determination of these layers comes with a margin of error as wide as 50,000 to100,000 years. Although 100,000 years may seem insignificant in terms of historical strata, it actually covers a long time period. Within this margin of error, numerous different life forms, even those who never shared a common time line, may be found in the same fossil layers. This fact shows how reliable linking fossil record can prove in providing evidence.

On another note, it is also quite astonishing that a narrow hip bone is considered sufficient for upright walking. Upright walking is a complex form of locomotion that requires many organs and systems from organs of balance to the spine, from the articulation system to hand-foot anatomy to work in harmony. It is obvious that narrowness of bone alone cannot be presented as evidence for upright walking. Many narrow-boned animals today are quadrupedal yet most of them cannot even stand on two legs for extended periods.

Brain volume 

The Sediba is said to have a brain volume of 420 cm³, which amounts to the 95% of that of an adult's. As it stands, it is quite small compared to an average human's brain volume of 1200 to 1400 cm³. Evolutionists claim that brain volume was supposed to have increased over time until it reached the volume it has today. So, does fossil record have any traces of the gradual growth of brain volume? The answer is a definitive no! The brain volume of the first human is exactly the same as the contemporary humans,

This is a fact that evolutionists are very well aware of. They try to fill the huge gap in between with fake fossils or monkey fossils they try to pass off as humanoid, or they present ancient human fossils as those of monkeys. The aim here is to make it look like there is a gradual change at work. Australopithecus species have perfectly apish qualities while Homo fossils have perfectly human qualities. Evolutionist frauds that are occasionally put forward are the products of this desperation.

For example, a fossil that had been introduced in the past under the name "Homo habilis" as supposedly "humanoid" and distorted with the aim to fill the gap between Australopithecus and human turned out years later to actually belong to an ape fossil and had to be renamed as Australopithecus habilis. ³

Likewise, the fossil "Turkana boy" that was presented as the so-called evolutionary ancestor of modern humans turned out to have the exact same qualities as modern humans and not a different species. ⁴

Of course, we must not forget Ardi! Ardipithecus ramidus was introduced as a bipedal transitional form. Having reassembled the severely deformed hip bones in a laboratory with the help of their imaginations, evolutionists claimed that the life form was bipedal. This claim drew heavy criticism from other evolutionist circles as well. It was obvious from its feet and other qualities it possessed that Ardi was a perfect climber with a body unsuitable for upright walking.  That is because Ardi was a bonobo chimpanzee. ⁵

Evolutionists' desperation

The fake or distorted fossil claims that have been produced for over a century actually offer the best proof for evolutionists' desperation. Fraud is a practice only resorted to in the absence of evidence. Unable to find even a single fossil that belongs to the transitional forms among near 700 million fossils at hand as they hoped to, evolutionists resorted to fraudulence. If species had really come into existence in a gradual manner, as evolutionists claim, there would have been many transitional forms among the myriad number of fossils; in fact, the fossil bed would have been brimming with transitional forms. However, all fossils at hand suddenly appear on the stage of history with all their qualities perfectly intact and continue their species without undergoing any change. In that case evolutionists have two options; they will either admit that transitional forms do not exist or try to keep their claims afloat by producing false evidence by altering and distorting fossils.

The first option is the sincere and scientific path. In the case of an absence of evidence, a scientist who conducts his scientific endeavors impartially will abandon the hypothesis and move on to working on new ones. The second path, on the other hand, is not a scientific but an ideological one; this path is paved on the exploitation of science for the sake of an atheistic ideology. So-called scientists are trying to keep their superstitious ideologies alive through supposedly scientific journals despite knowing the truth. Doing so brought success very easily a century ago due to lack of evidence and limited access to information. Evolutionists were able to easily make each other believe in the lies they invented. The impact of fabricated evidence would resound through decades. Today, however, along with the ever-growing scientific data and information having become largely accessible came the collapse of evolutionists' false ideologies; now everyone can clearly see how scientific data refutes evolution not to mention the fact that fake or misleading news can no longer have a long-lasting impact and are falsified within a few years at most. This situation is the definition of desperation for the evolutionist ideology. Evolutionists are no longer able to hold sway over large masses through their lies, and in fact, they merely humiliate themselves with their false claims.

Mr. Adnan Oktar's works and the impact they have made worldwide had played and will continue to play a huge role in exposing the evolutionists' deceits. The number of Darwinist news sites and publications is dwindling with each passing day. Evolutions are now having a hard time fabricating false evidence and deceiving people with fairy tales. We call on Darwinist scientists to assume a sincere and scientific demeanor on this matter and stop disregarding the evidence that brings about the collapse of the theory of evolution.

References:

1. http://harunyahya.com/en/Makaleler/22770/A-second-embarrassing-Ardi-case-for-Darwinists-Australopithecus-Sediba
2. http://harunyahya.com/en/Makaleler/22578/Why-are-Darwinists-so-determined-to-humiliate-themselves
3. http://harunyahya.com/en/Evrim-Sozlugu/16417/Homo-habilis
4. http://darwinism-watch.com/lie-of-human-evolution/the-claim-that-homo-erectus-was-a-primitive-species-is-nothing-but-prejudice
5. http://darwinism-watch.com/transitional-forms-deceit/darwinists-we-apologize-once-again-we-were-also-mistaken-about-ardi/

Did Cavemen Really Exist?

Have you ever considered the possibility that there never was a thing called the ‘caveman’? That there was never a time when people were living like animals, hunting and grunting, running around with clubs in their hands and animal furs wrapped around their bodies? Many people never thought that this could be the case, because the official narrative around the world insists that cavemen did exist, even though the archeological findings keep refuting it. But why?

Although fully refuted by scientific discoveries in biology, genetics and paleontology, there is still an immense effort to keep the theory of evolution alive. And those same circles are aware that if the history of human civilization does not match their imaginary theory of evolution, the number of unanswered questions will double. So they wrongly claim that human civilizations evolved too. In order to back up this scenario, imaginary times in history like the Stone Age, the Bronze Age, the Iron Age were invented, where humans were supposedly halfway through their civilization process.

However, something was clearly amiss. As the archeological findings increased and more and more details about the past civilizations emerged, the materialist thought of evolving human civilizations began falling apart at the seams. 40.000 year- old flutes showed that humans –at a time when the evolutionists wrongly claimed that they were primitive- made music, played it with the instruments they built, had fun, produced art and wore jewelry. In other words, they were like us and not primitive. Then scientists were confounded by the discovery of cave paintings that date back 30,000 years. These paintings and the paints used to create them were so impressive, they were clear evidence that people of the time were very advanced in their artistic skills. This was once again at a time when evolutionist claimed they were grunting primitive half-humans. However, these people were actually creating abstract art. Moreover, the paints they used were so durable that their art survived even after thousands of years. Wil Roebroeks, an expert in the archaeology of early humans from Leiden University in the Netherlands, expresses his surprise at this turn of events and admits: “...humans were more or less comparable to you and me.” Actually, they weren’t more or less comparable; they were the same as us. It is important to note here that many of our paintings today probably will not survive even maybe one thousand years. In that case, later civilizations can think we were primitive because nothing lasted to prove our advanced state of culture. When we apply this thinking to the past civilizations, it is highly likely that they also had advanced cultures but many of their achievements were lost to the destroying effect of passing time.

Then there is the Göbekli Tepe, which the Smithsonian Institute says ‘upends the conventional view of the rise of civilization.’ This is a site in Turkey that stunned the world in 1994 when a German archeologist revealed its importance. Göbekli Tepe is a 11,000 year -old site that proves that people of the time were not hunter-gatherers as previously imagined, but were rather highly sophisticated individuals who built temples in line with astronomical events, engaged in agriculture, created art by carving stones with intricate designs and used labor to carry huge stone blocks, some of which weigh as much as 50 tons. Scientists are still struggling to come to grips with the implications of these findings. Gary Rollefson, an archeologist with Whitman College in Washington says: ”With Göbekli Tepe, everything new that comes up destroys what we thought before. It’s nice to find this stuff, but it would be nice to understand it, too.” Another study suggests that the huge megalithic structures found at the site ‘may have been oriented – or even originally constructed - to “celebrate” and successively follow the appearance of a “new,” extremely brilliant star in the southern skies: Sirius.’ In other words, at a time when humans were supposed to be primitive according to the materialistic understanding, these people were highly civilized, studied astronomy, engaged in agriculture and produced art on stones. This makes one wonder: If stones are the only structures that are able to survive after thousands of years, one can only guess at the intricate art that was produced by these people on other, more fragile objects.

Then there are the famous pyramids of Egypt. Did you know that they are so incredibly built, even using today’s technology and every resource possible, that it would take 684 years to lay the 2.5 million blocks of the Great Pyramid of Cheops, built some 4,000 years ago, if ten blocks were laid every day. Yet scientists believe that this pyramid was built in a span of 20 to 30 years. So how did the Ancient Egyptians build these giant pyramids when there was supposedly no technology? By what power, with what machinery, by what techniques were the rock terraces set out? By what means were the rock tombs carved out? How was lighting provided during construction? (No staining or soot has been found on the walls or ceilings inside the pyramids and tombs.) How were blocks of stone removed from the quarries, and how were the differently shaped faces of the blocks smoothed? How were these blocks, weighing several tons, transported, and how were they fit together to an accuracy of 1/1000 of a centimeter? 

Or did you know about ancient stone carvings that clearly represent airplanes? Many ancient civilizations from the Sumerians to the Mayans left such stone carvings. For example, a model glider found in Egypt was discovered in 1898 and is 2,200 years old. The model's technical features are incredible. The shape and proportions of this wooden model's wings were designed in such a way as to give the aircraft a maximum lift with a minimum loss of speed, as in the Concorde, the product of today's most advanced technology. A History channel documentary says: “Over 2,000 years after the ancient Egyptians carved this mysterious bird, modern technology has proved beyond doubt that it could have flown.”

Even these few examples speak one truth loud and clear: there has never been a ‘primitive man.’ Humans have always been humans, and they have always lived humane lives, have built civilizations, only some of which left traces behind. In every period of our world, there have been communities that lived in higher civilizations while in other parts of the world people lived in rather primitive conditions, just like today. While in some parts of the world people are sending space shuttles into space, in the forests of the Amazon Basin, there are tribes that are completely cut off from the modern world and the amenities it offers. However, this certainly does not mean that people in Amazonian tribes are less developed biologically or mentally. This is just a result of differences in culture and civilization.

Evolution theory could not be proven – Once again

For 25 years, evolutionary biologist Professor Richard E. Lenski has been conducting a set of mutation experiments on 12 different E.coli bacteria population encompassing 60,000 generations.

The aim was to be able to conduct an observable evolution experiment called LTTE (Long-term evolution experiment).

With the efforts of the evolutionary scientists who had been looking for the traces of the theory of evolution in fossils having proven in vain, they focused on trying to prove evolution by conducting more frequent experiments on generations of bacteria in much shorter periods, which is the actual purpose of this experiment.

This meant that if a visible change could be observed in living generations, it would offer the long-awaited and desired proof for evolution. But as always, things did not go as evolutionists wished.

Over the course of 25 years, the experiments featured countless mutation attempts made on bacteria. In these experiments, said bacteria are left in an environment containing citrate (C6H5O7-3) and glucose.

Some of the bacteria go through various genetic mutations regarding the absorption and utilization of citrate molecule by the cell, and begin to digest the citrate in the environment as a source of carbon. This, in turn, leads to an enhanced growth rate in these bacteria due to increased nourishment. In the following generations, however, this growth rate starts slowing down, resulting in the extinction of most of the generations among said species or the development of species-specific diseases.

In conclusion, mutated generations either become sick or suffer from growth retardation, and just as it is with all life forms, the original genes of E.colibacteria, too, remain healthy and intact.

Contrary to what is claimed, this mutation is obviously neither beneficial nor evolution-triggering. Because since day one, E.coli bacteria have possessed the genes that brake down citrate. In the experiment, the mutated generations are observed to have an increased citrate absorption into the cell. An examination of its cause reveals an abnormality in the genes of citrate transporter protein. In other words, this is not a progression, but retrogression.

The function of citrate transporter is to enter the cell in anaerobic (oxygen-free) conditions to ensure citrate uptake into the cell. In this example, however, this system in the bacteria goes haywire, resulting in a constant citrate uptake into the cell and triggering an uncontrolled citrate metabolism.

Evolutionists are trying to present this as a beneficial mutation. They attempt to say "Look! There was this pressure, but after we reduced glucose, the bacteria gained the brand new ability of utilizing citrate,"; whereas the bacteria have already been in possession of the genes to utilize citrate and what happens here is the deterioration of the control mechanism of these genes. In other words, the available system in the cell is being impaired.

The situation can be likened to this; as is known, special sensors are placed on the streets, which are adjusted to the dark of the night. These sensors activate and turn the street lamps on when it gets dark. If there is any failure in the sensor system and the sensors detect that it is night-time for 24 hours, the street lamps will be turned on for 24 hours and they will be worn-down while wasting energy. This is a loss rather than an advantage. It means that a previously functioning system breaks down.

In the said example, which evolutionists try to arbitrarily present as evidence, there is no new information; on the contrary, there is a loss of information. Although the situation is quite obvious, the evolutionists still attempt to deceive people by resorting to tautology. It is actually a matter of a genetic disease caused as always by a mutation, not by evolution. When the cell was created out of nothing, it lost the perfectly balanced system it possessed and become deteriorated. Thus, the methods of demagogy evolutionists usually resort to have once again been disproven.

And this also should be noted: Despite the controlled mutations on 60,000 generations, the E.coli bacteria is still bacteria. It did not evolve into any other living thing.  This 25 years long experiment, once again could NOT PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE  for evolution theory.